{"id":332801,"date":"2024-06-14T07:41:28","date_gmt":"2024-06-14T05:41:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=332801"},"modified":"2024-06-14T07:41:30","modified_gmt":"2024-06-14T05:41:30","slug":"skeptical-science-gets-comeuppance-on-social-media","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=332801","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Skeptical Science\u2019 Gets Comeuppance on Social Media"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Master Resource<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Robert Bradley Jr.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cLet\u2019s see if Skeptical Science<\/a> makes another appearance on LinkedIn. It is up to 458 follows. And see if this organization will simply prepare an entry on what \u2018skeptic\u2019 arguments are the best. With that middle ground, maybe we can have a real debate.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

On LinkedIn, the alarmist Skeptical Science posted<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Somewhat surprisingly for what is regarded as a network of professionals, climate science misinformation is getting shared on LinkedIn as well. Here is a list of some signs to be on the lookout for when reading posts or comments related to human-caused climate change or global warming:<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Read the list here<\/a>, but their pitch is little more than \u2018trust us\u2019 and visit the DeSmog database of \u201cdeniers<\/a>\u201d for the bad actors. (Note: DeSmog\u2019s smear-list encyclopedia has backfired! First, there are so many excellent thinkers and influencers on the list that a new \u2018majority\u2019 has been identified<\/a>. Here is my entry<\/a>. Second, many folks not on the list are upset and want their non-alarmist views recognized.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Skeptical Science\u2019s list continued<\/a> in a comment that begins: \u201cSometimes a commenter\u2019s job or tagline can also give a clue. If there\u2019s a relationship to anything having to do with the fossil fuel or mining industries, whatever is being written might need to be read with a suitably large grain of salt<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And ends: \u201cReactions via the \u201elaugh\u201c icon on serious topics like human-caused climate change could either have happened accidentally (unlikely) or be a sign that the commenter doesn\u2018t quite (want to) grasp or accept scientific findings on the topic (quite likely)<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The comments were harsh. Here are some.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Randall Utech<\/a>: There are thousands of independently thinking individuals (geologists, geophysicists, astrophysicists, engineers, meteorologists, physicists, chemists) practicing science. They are not paid to confront the alarmists but merely see the climate science (a relatively immature science) as unsettled. Questioning the all-pervasive climate narrative is exactly what scientists should do. Unfortunately for many of the masses with little time to investigate on their own, the deck is stacked against them due to what is in most cases pervasive propaganda from your side of the of the arena.

You call yourself scientists but you disregard the fundamental purpose [of] science which is scientific debate. By silencing opposing viewpoints, you are no longer a scientist or providing scientific information, you are providing propaganda or misinformation. We want to have a full discourse of this topic. If you negate a viewpoint that doesn\u2019t conform to your view, you are not a scientist you are a manipulator; you care nothing about reality and only about the viewpoint you want to provide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rob Bradley<\/a>: So tell all of us on LinkedIn how to think and what to believe? Stay vague and invoke half-truths and strawmen\/women (above) and try to get the critics to \u2018lay down their arms\u2019?

I have engaged in numerous debates on LinkedIn with climate alarmists to great profit for me and for the other readers. Why not go ahead, Skeptical Science, and list the valid points of the CO2\/climate optimists?

Talk about the distribution of the enhanced greenhouse effect, time-series data on weather extremes, the saturation effect, government failure in the quest to address market failure, the role of adaptation instead of (futile) mitigation? And the ecological problems of wind, solar, and batteries?

Where\u2019s the middle ground, Skeptical Science? If you say there is none, I rest my case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My comment attracted 60 replies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Daniel Gruenberg<\/a>: \u201cSkeptical Science is founded by a partisan cartoonist, author of the famous massively debunked 97% consensus article and is the king of climate disinformation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

James Phillips<\/a> (retired geoscientist): \u201cThis has to be the most ridiculous post I have seen on LinkedIn since I joined 10 years ago. Any true scientist with independent thinking should disregard this complete propaganda \u2018climate religion\u2019 post.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hans Wolkers<\/a> (science journalist): \u201cGreat to see that skeptical science has a patent on the truth and doesn\u2019t want any scientific debate nor critically thinking scientists. I guess 97% of readers agree and believe these wonderful statements?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Robert Ballantyne<\/a>: \u201cConsensus is among scientist living on government largesse that agreed to \u2018hide the decline\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jim Ligon<\/a> (geophysicist): \u201cOh I get it! If I agree then I am good. If I question as a true scientist should do then I am bad. This is not science it is religious dogma on par with the inquisition. So how do you know climate alarmists are a hoax? The print garbage like this.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Graeme Morrison<\/a>: \u201cI like the rebuke of people \u2018just asking questions\u2019 as insincere. It made me laugh.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alexis Pilotelle<\/a>: \u201cImagine publishing the same post with \u201cquantum physics\u201d or \u201corganic chemistry\u201d instead of \u201cclimate science\u201d, taking one theory inside the field as the absolute not-to-be challenged truth. Not only this would create backlash but it would make highly suspicious the claim made by the only acceptable theory. Skeptical science should go back to basics and understand what science is instead of pushing propaganda.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Skeptical Science, blooded, joined in<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Well, our post seems to have hit a nerve based on the many comments exhibiting exactly the warning signs to be on the look-out for! Some people just seem to prefer that others do not know what these warning signs and red flags are.

Also note that some comments with baseless accusations and ad hominem attacks against Skeptical Science and our team have been deleted and any others will be deleted without notice. It\u2019s our page, so our rules apply.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Ad hominem?<\/em> That is what the we in the non-alarmist camp endure every minute of every day. From the above exchange one Jim Hunt could only question<\/a> my credentials to engage in the physical science debate. Funny how us amateurs can pin down the weaknesses of the alarmist argument (and why WUWT<\/a>, for example, is the world\u2019s leading climate website.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Final Comment<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSkeptical Science\u201d is a name akin to the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. A ploy to fool, in this case to draw in doubters to try to show that alarmist science is settled and, in fact, science. Nope, climate models and climate physics are the opposite of settled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s see if Skeptical Science<\/a> makes another appearance on LinkedIn. It is up to 458 follows. And see if this organization will simply prepare an entry on what \u2018skeptic\u2019 arguments are the best. With that middle ground, maybe we can have a real debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cLet\u2019s see if Skeptical Science makes another appearance on LinkedIn. It is up to 458 follows. And see if this organization will simply prepare an entry on what \u2018skeptic\u2019 arguments are the best. With that middle ground, maybe we can have a real debate.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":332803,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818056,691818087,691829202,691829203,691819484],"class_list":{"0":"post-332801","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-change","9":"tag-global-warming","10":"tag-linkedin","11":"tag-skeptical-science","12":"tag-social-media","14":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-misinformation.jpeg?fit=1778%2C1000&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1ozL","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":293922,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=293922","url_meta":{"origin":332801,"position":0},"title":"CONTROL the CLIMATE NARRATIVE to CONTROL THE SCIENCE and MANIPULATE THE PEOPLE!","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/01\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Remember this history! Because that\u2019s how climate alarmists have corrupted science!","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Alarmists\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Alarmists","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmists"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00GDBC1AmbsAAGcM6.jpeg?fit=1144%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00GDBC1AmbsAAGcM6.jpeg?fit=1144%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00GDBC1AmbsAAGcM6.jpeg?fit=1144%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00GDBC1AmbsAAGcM6.jpeg?fit=1144%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00GDBC1AmbsAAGcM6.jpeg?fit=1144%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":244170,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=244170","url_meta":{"origin":332801,"position":1},"title":"Standing Against The Climate Inquisition","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"22\/02\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Climate alarmists falsely claim to uphold the sanctity of scientific integrity while simultaneously violating the scientific method by suppressing debate, scientific inquiry, and the free exchange of ideas.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-629.png?fit=1200%2C761&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-629.png?fit=1200%2C761&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-629.png?fit=1200%2C761&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-629.png?fit=1200%2C761&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-629.png?fit=1200%2C761&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":267633,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=267633","url_meta":{"origin":332801,"position":2},"title":"Another skeptical Nobel Laureate of Physics \u2014 \u201cClimate science has metastasized\u201d","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201c\u2026climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0in-50-anni-preso-serio-john-clauser-oggi-vinto-nobel-v3-624456.jpg?fit=1024%2C576&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0in-50-anni-preso-serio-john-clauser-oggi-vinto-nobel-v3-624456.jpg?fit=1024%2C576&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0in-50-anni-preso-serio-john-clauser-oggi-vinto-nobel-v3-624456.jpg?fit=1024%2C576&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0in-50-anni-preso-serio-john-clauser-oggi-vinto-nobel-v3-624456.jpg?fit=1024%2C576&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":277286,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=277286","url_meta":{"origin":332801,"position":3},"title":"The Epistemological Crisis: A Misguided Dive into Supposed Climate Denial and the Danger of Constructed Narratives","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/09\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The epistemological crisis occurring is one of a failing expertocracy forcing its viewpoints and worldviews through an onslaught of propaganda and censorship on a populace that can see the contradictions and flaws in those viewpoints.","rel":"","context":"In \"Censorship\"","block_context":{"text":"Censorship","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=censorship"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/image-156.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/image-156.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/image-156.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/image-156.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/image-156.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":200103,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=200103","url_meta":{"origin":332801,"position":4},"title":"LinkedIn\u2019s Climate \u201cScript\u201d","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/05\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Guest \u201cLevel playing field, my @$$\u201d by David Middleton Over the past year or so, a number of scientists, skeptical of the alarmist climate change narrative, have been banned from LinkedIn or closed out their accounts due to the censorship of their well-documented articles on climate change. Among these people\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/00Screenshot-2022-05-16-194010.png?fit=1200%2C797&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/00Screenshot-2022-05-16-194010.png?fit=1200%2C797&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/00Screenshot-2022-05-16-194010.png?fit=1200%2C797&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/00Screenshot-2022-05-16-194010.png?fit=1200%2C797&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/00Screenshot-2022-05-16-194010.png?fit=1200%2C797&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":420541,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=420541","url_meta":{"origin":332801,"position":5},"title":"Studying Skeptics Through a Keyhole: Why Climate Communication Research Can\u2019t See What It Refuses to Understand","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/01\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"This is the title of a recent article published on January 7, 2026, by Charles Rotter on Watts Up With That. Charles Rotter tells the story behind an academic paper by Bernhard Forchtner, titled \"The Rise of (Affective) Obstruction: Conceptualizing the Evolution of Far-Right Climate Change Communication (1986\u20132018),\" which was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"1986 and 2018\"","block_context":{"text":"1986 and 2018","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=1986-and-2018"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQPIHrxbLN1UIiNN0lD9Pds3nKt29hBD9gNc4OSDRsboh4pR7qaD3gexdD8Y0zRCnvQ0-9PCBM2XyoR-zXaGYrVXZvrtSDbtBKH0LO7DeT-4rfBUz4LWYj0NkiS9D_Po-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C610&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQPIHrxbLN1UIiNN0lD9Pds3nKt29hBD9gNc4OSDRsboh4pR7qaD3gexdD8Y0zRCnvQ0-9PCBM2XyoR-zXaGYrVXZvrtSDbtBKH0LO7DeT-4rfBUz4LWYj0NkiS9D_Po-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C610&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQPIHrxbLN1UIiNN0lD9Pds3nKt29hBD9gNc4OSDRsboh4pR7qaD3gexdD8Y0zRCnvQ0-9PCBM2XyoR-zXaGYrVXZvrtSDbtBKH0LO7DeT-4rfBUz4LWYj0NkiS9D_Po-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C610&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQPIHrxbLN1UIiNN0lD9Pds3nKt29hBD9gNc4OSDRsboh4pR7qaD3gexdD8Y0zRCnvQ0-9PCBM2XyoR-zXaGYrVXZvrtSDbtBKH0LO7DeT-4rfBUz4LWYj0NkiS9D_Po-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C610&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQPIHrxbLN1UIiNN0lD9Pds3nKt29hBD9gNc4OSDRsboh4pR7qaD3gexdD8Y0zRCnvQ0-9PCBM2XyoR-zXaGYrVXZvrtSDbtBKH0LO7DeT-4rfBUz4LWYj0NkiS9D_Po-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C610&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332801","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=332801"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332801\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":332804,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332801\/revisions\/332804"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/332803"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=332801"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=332801"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=332801"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}